THE REVOLUTION IN HUMAN BIOTECHNOLOGY
T
Despite promised
benefits, the latest
developments in the
human
biotechnology
industry have grave
ethical implications
for our genetic
privacy and
integrity.
by Susan Bryce ©1997
c/- Post Office
Mapleton, Qld 4560
Australia
Telephone: +61 (0)7 5445 7345
JUNE - JULY 1997
he 'gods' of the new millennium may not be aliens from another planet, but multi-
billion-dollar biotechnology companies that own plant, animal and human genes.
The gods will create new life through genetic manipulation, cloning and tissue
culturing. Their disease-resistant creations, developed in sterile laboratories, will
be the alien life-forms of the 21st century.
What happens if elite groups have control of our genetic destiny? What happens if
human clones are produced; if humans are genetically adapted for deep-space travel; if
education, employment and insurance are determined by our genes; if human genes
become the intellectual property portfolios of transnational corporations?
The new world of human biotechnology currently being ushered in by genomic corpo-
rations, technocratic government agencies and the pioneers of medical science makes
Aldous Huxley's Brave New World look like a freedom-loving paradise. Human biotech-
nology is currently undergoing a revolution. Many of the techniques Huxley envisaged
for the distant future are already available or are being forecast by reputable scientists.
Human genes have become industrial commodities to be bought, sold and patented.
Transnational genomic corporations, known as the "Life Sciences" industries, are swal-
lowing up biotechnology companies, and a few enormous genomic corporations are con-
solidating the ownership of life.
The government-sponsored Human Genome Project, haunted by the shadow of Nazi
eugenics and likened in size and importance to the Manhattan and Apollo projects, has
given biotechnology a shot in the arm.
Operating in a virtual regulation and policy vacuum, where compliance to 'standards'
and 'ethics' is voluntary, the rampant and uncontrolled progress of the human biotech
industry has the capacity to impact seriously upon our collective destiny.
Genetic engineering and other disciplines such as embryo transfer, molecular biology
and tissue culture are part of modern human biotechnology.
Biotechnology involves the development of 'products' by exploiting biological process-
es or substances for human purposes. It involves using organisms to provide us with
food, medicine, clothes and other products. Traditional biotechnology was based on
activities such as the farming of animals and plants and the use of micro-organisms in the
manufacture of beer, wine, bread, yoghurt and cheese.
However, since the mid-1970s, when a small group of individuals began to realise that
computers and gene sequencing were a natural marriage, advances in biotechnology have
given the discipline a more menacing edge. What started as pioneering research to devel-
op 'cures' for genetic diseases, cancer and AIDS has turned into a lucrative, profit-moti-
vated industry.
To its advocates, modern biotechnology is ideologically neutral. Properly supported,
biotechnology can bring immense benefits to humanity, for it is infinitely adaptable to
counter all sorts of unforeseen threats. If we cast it down through hostility or faint-heart-
edness, we will be losers.
Critics see biotechnology as the expansion, misapplication and institutionalisation of a
particular scientific creed, with the potential for the devaluation and exploitative manipu-
lation of life. Jeremy Rifkin, quoted in The Human Body Shop: The Engineering and
Marketing of Life, describes human biotechnology as "the devil at the door, cleverly dis-
guised as an engineer and an entrepreneur".
NEXUS • 31
LICENSING LIFE: THE BIOTECH BILLIONS are bound up in a web of alliances and interests. Research and
On 14 March 1995, the United States Patent and Trademark development is concentrated in the hands of a few companies.
Office issued the first patent on a human cell line to the US One example is the "superclub" set up by the France-based multi-
National Institutes of Health (NIH). The unmodified cell line was national drugs company Rhône-Poulenc Rorer, and operated by
drawn from an indigenous person from Papua New Guinea. its subsidiary, RPR Gencell of Collegeville, Pennsylvania, USA.
Human life is now officially a commodity whose ownership can The "superclub" is touted as an admirable venture because it
be legally enforced by patents awarded to genomic corporations will accelerate the development of gene therapies for cancer, car-
on human genes and their by-products. diovascular disease, obesity, etc., through the use of shared data
Since this new and outrageous era in intellectual property was and technology. It will also accelerate the profits raked in by
launched, the 'life industries' have raced to identify and commer- RPR Gencell. One of the conditions of joining the "superclub" is
cialise human genes and other human biological materials. that researchers should withhold publication of their findings for a
The Rural Advancement Foundation International (RAFI) year until RPR Gencell files for patents to protect discoveries or
describes the frenzied endeavours to profit from human biological inventions. This gives RPR Gencell a great deal of control over
materials as a modern-day gold rush, a gene rush: researchers' findings.
...silent and reckless with incalculable stakes for The 14 "superclub" members include:
humankind...the commodity they seek to exploit is not gold • CNRS (France's National Centre for Scientific Research)
but biological information. The raw material they need is • Généthon, Paris
human DNA: the blueprint of human life. • Gustave Roussy Institute, Paris
Each human cell contains up to 100,000 genes. A single patent- • Transgène, Paris
ed cell line can be worth US$1.5 billion dollars per year to a com- • Applied Immune Sciences, Santa Clara, California
pany involved in the life sciences industries. Research conducted • Darwin Molecular, Seattle, Washington
by RAFI reveals that more than 1,000 DNA patents on sequences • Genetix Pharmaceuticals, New York
have already been issued to over 300 companies and government • Introgen Therapeutics, Houston, Texas
institutions. • Lawrence Berkeley Human Genome Center, Berkeley,
Just one small portion of the human biotechnology industry can California
yield lucrative profits. The US consulting firm Frost and Sullivan • Virogenetics, Troy, New York
estimates that the worldwide market for cell lines and tissue cul- Another example is the company Human Genome Sciences
tures brought in US$427.6 million in (HGS) of Rockville, Maryland, which
corporate revenues in 1996. Frost owns the details of DNA sequences
and Sullivan predict that the market that could identify 35,000 human
will grow at an average annual rate Human life is now officially a genes—more than a third of the total
of 13.5 per cent over the next seven thought to exist.
years, to be worth US$914.1 million commodity whose ownership can In October 1994, HGS announced
by 2002. be legally enforced by patents that any researcher who wanted to use
Biotech companies are rushing to the information held by HGS could do
isolate a plethora of disease-carrying awarded to genomic corporations so for free, on the basis that if the
genes, including the genes that cause on human genes and their researcher came up with something
colon cancer, lung cancer, prostate that could be commercialised, such as
cancer, cystic fibrosis, heart disease by-products. a test or treatment for a disease, HGS
and asthma. Once patented, these would have the right to negotiate a
genes are worth billions of dollars in marketing contract. HGS sees this
licensing fees and spinoffs from the seemingly modest demand as a way to
manufacture of other pharmaceuticals and gene technology. pay back its investors, such as the pharmaceuticals company
Some patents already awarded include: SmithKline Beecham which has poured US$100 million into HGS
• The hepatitis C virus sequence, patented by the US biotech and its non-profit arm, The Institute for Genomic Research
company, Chiron Corporation. (TIGR).
• The gene for breast cancer susceptibility, patented by Myriad In biotechnology, as in many other fields, government agencies
Genetics. are forming alliances with corporations. In 1995, the US Patent
• A European patent on the use of stored stem cells from umbil- and Trademark Office issued a patent to the US National
ical cord blood, granted to the US company Biocyte Corporation. Institutes of Health, covering the principle of removing cells from
Such cells are widely thought to hold considerable therapeutic a patient, altering their genetic makeup and returning them to the
promise for bone marrow transplantation and gene therapy. body. Almost all gene therapy trials that have been approved so
• The gene for H2-relaxin, a protein produced within the ovaries far rely on this technique. The NIH has given GTI, of
which relaxes connective tissue to allow a woman's pelvic girdle Gaithersburg, Maryland, exclusive rights to develop the technique
to widen during pregnancy and while giving birth. commercially. Rival companies wanting to do research must now
Once a company has a patent (say, on a gene-sequencing right), pay a licensing fee to GTI.
it must be paid a royalty or licence fee by others using that Alleged industrial espionage is rife as biotech companies pro-
sequence. Chiron claims that it invests more than five times its ceed with litigation against each other. One legal battle involves
income from hepatitis C licensing in its research program—a total mice that have been 'developed' to secrete human antibodies
of US$344 million in 1995. Thus, the income received from the which may help treat AIDS and cancer. The 'humanised' mice,
hepatitis C virus sequence licensing fees would be valued at worth millions, were the subject of a bitter dispute between the
US$68.8 million for that year alone. two US companies Cell Genesys and GenPharm. Cell Genesys
Companies involved in human, plant and animal biotechnology withdrew its legal action upon learning that the US Patent and

32 • NEXUS JUNE - JULY 1997

Trade Mark Office had awarded GenPharm a third patent on the
mouse 'technology'. Cell Genesys will now use its own patents to
battle GenPharm.
AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY: THE SAME STORY
Not only is ownership of human biological materials being con-
solidated by "life sciences" companies; but the products of agri-
culture have met with the same fate.
The "life sciences" company Monsanto, with 28,000 employ-
ees, has a net worth of US$9 billion and pours US$200 million
per year into research. Monsanto's Robert Fraley said of their
agricultural biotechnology interests:
...what you're seeing is not just a consolidation of seed com -
panies, it's really a consolidation of the entire food chain.
Through its shareholdings, acquisitions and licensing agree-
ments, Monsanto has a controlling interest in the worldwide pro-
duction of canola oil, soya, cotton and maize, to name a few.
Last year, the two giant pharmaceutical/chemical companies
Ciba-Geigy and Sandoz amalgamated in what was the largest cor-
porate merger in history—even larger than the Time-Life merger.
The resultant new company, Novartis (whose Latin name means
"new skills" or "new arts"), spans the health care, nutrition and
agribusiness industries. Its estimated global net worth is 58 bil-
lion Swiss francs—more than the value of most nations. Novartis'
global research expenditure for 1996
was US$3.1 billion, while worldwide
sales revenue for 1996 was US$27
billion. ... indigenous
BIOPIRACY OF HUMAN
currently being exploited by
GENETIC MATERIAL governments and genomic
Third world populations and
indigenous peoples are currently corporations seeking to
being exploited by governments and commercialise genes and other
genomic corporations seeking to
commercialise genes and other bio- biological materials.
logical materials.
When the US government patented
the cell line of a Papua New Guinean
indigenous person, there was no documentation of his informed
consent or any approval from the Papua New Guinea government.
Documentation obtained by RAFI under Freedom of
Information legislation revealed that the patented cells from the
Hagahai indigenous person from Papua New Guinea had potential
in the diagnosis and treatment of leukaemia and related retroviral
diseases. These genes are now the exclusive property of the US
government. Various acts of biopiracy have been the subject of
investigation by RAFI, which concludes:
Pieces of indigenous and remote rural peoples' very bodies
are now, without any doubt, the potential 'intellectual
property' of corporations and governments...
Cells, DNA and other human biological materials are being
shuttled into the intellectual property portfolios and cash boxes of GenBank at Los Alamos.
the life industries.
RAFI has also raised concerns about the collection, handling
and exchange of human tissue samples taking place ad hoc across
international borders. Perhaps what is most controversial about
the patenting of genes and the use of human biological products
for profit is that it is all largely taking place in an unregulated
market. According to RAFI:
An unfortunate reality currently confronts the enormous
number of people who, for clinical and research purposes,
give blood or other samples of tissue. They may unwittingly
JUNE - JULY 1997
become a statistic in the international human tissue trade—in
some cases even if the tissue donor simply gave blood for a
blood bank. Donors' cells may be frozen and/or immortal -
ized and shipped across town, across the world, or both.
Genetic profile information from analysis of cells...may be
created and placed in a database available to thousands.
RAFI's enquiries revealed one Internet directory of tissue cul-
ture-related enterprises that lists 38 companies in the US which
specialise in selling cells, cell products and tools for cell cultur-
ing. Some have Internet home pages where customers can peruse
on-line catalogues of "normal" and/or "mutant" human tissue for
sale. Human biological samples are being exchanged and used in
ways that donors would not be aware of, nor would be likely to
endorse.
THE HUMAN GENOME PROJECT
The aim of the Human Genome Project is to determine the
exact genetic structure of our species—the sequence of all of our
DNA. The idea for the project has been in the pipeline since the
US military began studying the genetic effects of radiation on sur-
vivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
In the mid-1970s, technological developments enabled
researchers to use high-speed computers to sequence or map
genes. Previous methods of gene-mapping relied on laborious
hand-made drawings of gene maps.
In the late 1980s, biologists realised
that with new technologies they could
peoples are sequence the entire human genome.
For obvious reasons, this 'realisation'
was supported by the US government,
military, educational institutions and
biotech companies. The US govern-
ment moved quickly to merge fund-
ing for various biotech projects.
The Human Genome Project was
officially launched in 1991, funded
primarily by the Department of
Energy and the National Institutes of
Health in the USA as well as the
European Commission.
Using high-speed computers and working with zenith nanotech-
nology (i.e., single molecules), the human genome is now being
entered onto the GenBank database at Los Alamos (weapons)
Laboratories in New Mexico, USA—site of the Manhattan Project
and more recently linked to the alleged Roswell 'alien autopsy'
scenario.
Researchers from the far corners of the globe are able to con-
tribute information to GenBank via the Internet. Laboratories are
offered 'incentives' to submit genomic information. Another
motivation to submit information to GenBank is the growing
number of journals that will not publish genomic articles without
proof that the authors have submitted their data electronically to
GenBank is operated by the US Department of Energy-owned
national laboratory but funded by the National Institutes of
Health, the Department of Defense, the National Science
Foundation and the Department of Energy. There is also a
Human Genome Center at Lawrence Berkeley and at Lawrence
Livermore national laboratories.
Once the first complete human DNA sequence is obtained, we
will have what has been described as the 'biological grail'—a
complete record of the human genome. This will be of great use
to the life sciences industries because it will provide a database of
NEXUS • 33
information from which companies can obtain the DNA sequence, from HTLV-1 blood samples.
and hence protein sequence, of all the proteins in humans, includ- As documented by RAFI, several key US research institutes—
ing those which are the potential targets of new drugs. The including the National Cancer Institute and the Centers for
Human Genome Project will also be of substantial assistance in Disease Control—and the US Navy have global research pro-
medical genetics, including the diagnosis of inherited predisposi- grams tasked with collecting blood samples for HTLV-1 research.
tion to disease. Some readers of NEXUS will be familiar with the AIDS-HTLV
The first complete human genome sequence is expected to be a link, reported in 1988 (see the NEXUS supplement, AIDS: The
'composite person' with both an X and Y sex chromosome. This Real Story). HTLV-1 can be used to manufacture large quantities
would formally make the 'composite person' a male, but 'he' of the AIDS-related virus, HTLV-3.
would comprise autosomes taken from men and women of several
nations: the United States, European countries and Japan. He NAZI EUGENICS AND ECONOMIC RATIONALISM
would be a multinational, multiracial mélange, a kind of "Adam A plethora of ethicists and historians have raised concerns
II", his essence encoded for the 21st century and beyond. about connections between experimental processes involving
human biotechnology and the Nazi 'legacy'.
THE HUMAN GENOME AS A WEAPON OF WAR Nazi genetic experiments were not an historical aberration that
The Human Genome Project is a vital part of the US post-Cold can be dismissed. The forces that inspired them did not die with
War military strategy. Psychological, biological and defensive them. The Nazis drew inspiration from many sources, not least of
technology for conflict short of war is of growing importance. To which was the eugenics movement in the USA.
this end, the human genome was recently declared a potential Indeed, fear of a eugenics revival is a key anxiety surrounding
weapon of war. the Human Genome Project in the United States and Europe.
Eighty member-countries of the Biological and Toxic Weapons Eugenics involves any attempt to improve the biological char-
Convention added "molecular biology" and "any application acter of a 'race'. Under Adolf Hitler, German scientists—among
resulting from genomic studies" to the list of technologies, such as the most respected in the world before the Nazi era—took part in
genetic engineering, that could possibly be employed as weapons. an ignominious attempt to create an Aryan blue-eyed, blond-
Scientists are concerned that haired master race through genetic
aggressors might develop a disease manipulation and experimentation.
or poison to which only an enemy is In a paper titled "Nazi Biomedical
genetically susceptible. "...once the human genome has Policies", published in the book,
The member countries failed to
agree to a deadline for monitoring been mapped, it has the potential When Medicine Went Mad, Robert N.
Proctor gives this stern reminder:
breaches of the convention because to become a standard, or norm, The Nazis sought to transform
of opposition from a group of problems of racial, sexual or
nations including Russia and India. for all people—against which we social deviance into medical
In October 1989, at the Human will then be measured for our problems; Germany's social and
Genome I Conference held in San political problems would be
Diego, USA, James B. Watson, the normality or abnormality." solved by diagnosis, disinfection
Human Genome Project's first direc- and surgery. Murder was prac -
tor (and co-discoverer of DNA's tised in the name of quarantine;
structure in 1953) told the audience: apartheid in the name of public
We have to be aware of the really terrible past of eugenics, health...
where incomplete knowledge was used in a very cavalier and Could modern 'eugenics' programs be prompted by the engine
rather awful way, both here in the United States and in of economic rationalism now driving the economies of most
Germany. We have to reassure people that their own DNA is nations? Policies are characterised as eugenic if their intent is to
private and that no one else can get it... further a social or public purpose, such as reducing costs or spar-
In light of the above reports about gene patenting, it would ing future generations unnecessary suffering.
seem that Watson's words of caution fell on deaf ears. Could genetic inheritance become a new basis for discrimina-
tion? This was a topic of discussion at the Human Genome
HUMAN GENOME DIVERSITY PROJECT Organization's Second International Genome Summit, held in
The Human Genome Project should not be confused with the Canberra, Australia, in October 1996. It was an informal meeting
Human Genome Diversity Project (HGDP), which is a separate of about 50 people. Australian GeneEthics Network Coordinator
but related project concerned with collecting cells from over 700 Bob Phelps was the lonely voice of the people in a wilderness of
indigenous clans and tribes worldwide. heavyweight experts including scientists and lawyers.
The unscrupulous methods for collecting cells and the traffick- The GeneEthics Network is involved in lobbying against genet-
ing and trade in indigenous people's biological materials is well ic engineering of plants, animals and humans and raising public
documented by the Rural Advancement Foundation International. awareness of biotechnology. Most recently the network has been
The US Navy has also been undertaking its own private involved with a campaign against Monsanto's "Roundup Ready"
research activities involving the collection of cells and tissues genetically engineered soybean.
from remote tribes and clans in Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, At the Australian Genome Summit, one participant, Dr David
Peru and Colombia. Of particular interest are blood samples con- Cox of the Stanford School of Medicine, California, USA, stated:
taining the retrovirus HTLV-1. Genetic discrimination to exclude people from employment,
The previously mentioned Hagahai cell line, patented by the US insurance and access to health care is a potential adverse
National Institutes of Health, contains the human leukaemia retro- consequence of the data generated by the Project. Protection
virus HTLV-1. Thymus lymphocytes (T-cells) can be separated against such discrimination should prevail over conflicting

34 • NEXUS JUNE - JULY 1997

 societal values; such protection must be mandated...
Despite moves in the US and Europe to tighten controls on
genetic discrimination, to date no such protection exists in
Australia.
Bob Phelps of the GeneEthics Network told this writer that:
...once the human genome has been mapped, it has the poten -
tial to become a standard, or norm, for all people—against
which we will then be measured for our normality or abnor -
mality. It is going to lead potentially to some great discrimi -
nations and other adverse social consequences...
This has great significance for us all. The coercive forces of
economic rationalism that equate progress with cost efficiency
could dictate that it would be cost-effective to reduce the number
of genetically disabled people. People with disabilities or illness- been cloned. In 1993, researchers Stillman and Hall, of George
es could become doomed by their genes. Public policy could
pressure or even compel people not to bring genetically damaged
children into the world for the sake of the gene pool and in the
interests of keeping down public health costs.
New genetics techniques that might extend our lives could justi- tions were filed and research papers prepared for publication. The
fy experiments on the terminally ill on the basis that they are
'doomed anyway' and so have 'nothing to lose'. Equally, projects
that generate large incomes for researchers and potentially huge
profits for private corporations could be oversold.
George Annas, lawyer and Professor of Public Health at Boston
University, says there are powerful
forces at work in our society that
could combine to affect dramatically
the rights and welfare of the less than
genetically perfect, creating a culture
in which people are valued and
devalued based on their genetic
Other more exotic schemes
endowment. Embryos could be include 'adapting' humans for
screened and nurtured based on
genetic quality.
deep- space travel.
Writing about the Human Genome
Project, Annas says that our fetish
for efficiency, our quest for immor-
tality, our belief in commercialism
and its handmaiden hype will contin-
ue the slide down the slippery slope. The question now is: how
far and how fast?
THE BIO-ELITES' VISION FOR THE FUTURE
The brave new future that Aldous Huxley depicted is already
upon us, with many techniques he envisaged already available or
at least being taken seriously by reputable scientists.
The 1995 "foresighting program" conducted by the Australian
Science and Technology Council (ASTEC) provides an insight
into the future. Under the heading, "Scenario for 2010: Impact of
Research into the Human Genome and Environmental Impact on
Health", ASTEC suggests that our future may be determined by a
genetic profile—which would determine that individuals should
eat certain designer foods and have certain designer therapies
throughout life to prevent the onset of genetic disease.
If people were not willing to be engineered in such a way, they
could be refused insurance, employment and education. This
way, genetic destiny would be manipulated by designer foods and
designer therapies.
The advocates of the recently developed concept of "auto-evo-
lution" theorise that elite groups of humans should use existing
gene technologies to start directing the evolution of their off-
spring. Auto-evolutionists envisage that in six generations, or 350
years, humans would be unrecognisable.
JUNE - JULY 1997
Other more exotic schemes include 'adapting' humans for deep-
space travel. This may sound like a giddy science fiction sce-
nario, but, already, one Australian company is developing pine
and eucalypt species that do not require open pollination. It was
shown in studies carried out in the "Biosphere" project that the
pollinators had difficulty surviving. Is the biotech industry ready-
ing to create artificial environments outside the Earth's biosphere
in deep space?
Could we 'adapt' the human species to explore the deep oceans,
or 'produce' soldiers resistant to agents of biological war? Such
proposals are currently under consideration.
In publicity over the recent cloning of "Dolly" the sheep, it
seems to have been forgotten that human embryos have already
Washington University, USA, cloned 48 human embryos, none of
which grew for more than six days.
Dolly, the cloned sheep, born at the Roslin Institute in Scotland
in July 1996, was 'unveiled' in February 1997 after patent applica-
non-profit Roslin Institute is part-funded by PPL Therapeutics, a
biotech company formed in 1987 to commercialise the Roslin
Institute's research.
According to RAFI, PPL Therapeutics has several human pro-
tein products in development and holds a US patent on a method
to produce therapeutic proteins in the
milk of transgenic sheep. PPL has
research agreements with at least four
major pharmaceutical corporations
including Novo-Nordisk, American
Home Products, Bayer and
Boehringer Ingleheim.
Scientists believe that cloned ani-
mals with genetically engineered
traits will become highly efficient,
living drug-factories for 'use' in the
manufacture of therapeutic proteins.
The market for therapeutic proteins is
currently about US$7.6 billion per
annum and is expected to grow to
US$18.5 billion by 2000.
Cloned animals could be exploited as 'spare parts' factories for
humans. Transgenic pig clones, for example, could be genetically
engineered to be a source of replacement organs for humans.
In the twilight years of the 20th century, human biotechnology
joins the ranks of environmental decay, nuclear conflict, surveil-
lance technology, monopoly ownership and government-spon-
sored corporatism as one of the most dangerous threats to our
physical, intellectual and spiritual freedom.
The slide down the slippery slope has already begun, but public
opinion can dictate how fast and how far we go. If we do not act
now, our future will be determined by the bio-elites.
References: Books
• Annas, George J., "The Human Genome Project in Perspective: Confronting our Past to
Protect our Future" in When Medicine Went Mad: Bioethics and the Holocaust (Arthur L.
Caplan, ed.), Humana Press, Totowa, New Jersey, USA, 1992.
• ASTEC (Australian Science and Technology Council), "Developing Long-Term
Strategies for Science and Technology in Australia", findings of the study, Matching
Science and Technology to Future Needs 2010, Australian Government Publishing
Service, Australia, 1996.
• ASTEC, Gene Technology Issues for Australia, Occ. Paper No. 27, AGPS, August 1993.
• Bains, William, Biotechnology from A-Z, Oxford University Press, UK, 1993.
• Cook-Deegan, Robert, The Gene Wars: Science, Politics and the Human Genome,
W. W. Norton &Company, New York, 1994.
Continued on page 83
NEXUS • 35
 — The BioElites: Engineering our Future —
Continued from page 35
• Kevles, Daniel J. and Hood, Leroy (eds), The Code of
Codes: Scientific and Social Issues in the Human Genome
Project, Harvard University Press, UK, USA, 1992.
• Kimbrell, Andrew, The Engineering and Marketing of
Life, HarperSanFrancisco, USA, 1993.
• Lyon, Jeff and Gorner, Peter, Altered Fates: Gene
Therapy and the Retooling of Human Life, W. W. Norton
&Company, Inc., New York, 1995.
• Packard, Vance, The People Shapers: Is Science Shaping
Man?, Future Publications, 1978.
• Proctor, Robert N., "Nazi Biomedical Policies" in When
Medicine Went Mad: Bioethics and the Holocaust (Arthur
Caplan, ed.), Humana Press, New Jersey, USA, 1992.
• Reiss, Michael J. and Straughan, Roger, Improving
Nature? The Science and Ethics of Genetic Engineering,
Cambridge University Press, UK, 1996.
• Science and Engineering Council, Gene Technology,
Office of the Chief Scientist, Department of the Prime
Minister and Cabinet, Australia, 1993.
• Shiva, Vandana and Moser, Ingunn, Biopolitics: A
Feminist and Ecological Reader on Biotechnology, Zed
Books, London, 1995.
• Sitchin, Zecharia, Genesis Revisited, Avon Books, New
York, 1990.
• Walmsley, Jane and Margolis, Jonathan, Hot House
People: Can We Create Super Human Beings?, Pan
Books, London, 1987.
• Weir, Robert F., Lawrence, Susan C., Fales, Evan, Genes
and Human Self-Knowledge: Historical and Philosophical
Reflections on Modern Genetics, University of Iowa Press,
Iowa City, USA, 1994.
References: Journal Articles
• RAFI Communiqué, May/June 1995, March/April 1996,
January/February 1997, March/April 1997.
JUNE - JULY 1997
• "Gene superclub signs up top players", New Scientist, 19
November 1994, p. 4; "Squabbling all the way to the
genebank", New Scientist, 26 November 1994, pp. 14-15.
• "Mapping the human body: Ethical and legal implica-
tions of the Human Genome Project", Alternative Law
Journal, vol. 8, no. 5, October 1993, pp. 240-241.
• "The political economy of genes", Journal of Australian
Political Economy, no. 36, December 1995, pp. 104-113.
• "Current research project on the legal and ethical aspects
of genetic research in Australia", Journal of Law and
Medicine, vol. 3, no. 1, August 1995, pp. 30-35.
• "Rumour, bloody rumour: Vampire Project—the Human
Genome Diversity Project", Time Australia, vol. 9, no. 6, 7
February 1994, p. 49.
• "Fast track for false promises: genetic engineering",
Habitat Australia, vol. 22, no. 1, February 1994, pp. 38-43.
• "New dilemmas for law and medicine", Reform the Law:
Essays on the Renewal of the Australian Legal System,
1983, pp. 217-242.
• "Genetic engineering: miracle or menace?" Chain
Reaction, no. 62, October 1990, pp. 24-29.
• "Human Genome Diversity Project", Search, vol. 25, no.
3, April 1994, pp. 85-90.
• "Human DNA: cracking the code—implications of the
Human Genome Project", 21C: Previews of a Changing
World, Summer 1990/91, pp. 39-44.
• "The Human Genome Project: for better or for worse?",
Medical Journal of Australia, vol. 152, no. 9, May 1990,
pp. 484-486.
• "Clone Hype", The Bulletin, 9 Nov. 1993, pp. 72-78.
• "To build or be built: is that the new question?", Search,
vol. 25, no. 4, May 1994, pp. 123-126.
• "The Challenge of Genetic Engineering", IPAReview,
vol. 45, no. 2, 1992, pp. 20-23.
• "Existence without life: disability and genetics",
Australian Disability Review, no. 1, 1995, pp. 3-16.
• "Some ethical issues associated with genetic engineering
for people with disabilities", Australian Disability Review,
no. 2, 1992, pp. 12-13.
References: Information Sources
• Australian GeneEthics Network, c/- Australian
Conservation Foundation, 340 Gore St, Fitzroy, Vic. 3065,
Australia; ph (03) 9416 2222; fax (03) 9436 0767;
e-mail: acfgenet@peg.apc.org
• Friends of the Earth, Victoria, ph (03) 9419 8700.
• Genetic Resources Action International, Jonquers 16-6-D,
E-08003 Barcelona, Spain.
• Rural Advancement Foundation International: Australia,
ph (079) 39 4792, e-mail: rafiaus@peg. apc.org, web site:
http://www.charm.net/rafi/rafihome.html; International
office, ph (613) 567 6880, e-mail: rafican@rafi.ca; USA,
ph (919) 542 1396, e-mail: communique@rafiusa.org
• Union of Concerned Scientists, UCS Agriculture and
Biotechnology Program, 1616 P. St, NW, Washington, DC
20036, USA.
References: Web Sites
• Human Genome Organization (HUGO):
http://www.er.doe.gov/production/oher/hug_top.html
• Human Genome Summit 1996, Canberra, Australia:
http://hugo.gdb.org/summit96.html
• Monsanto:
http://www.monsanto.com/monpub/newstuff.html
• National Institutes of Health, USA:
http://www.ncib.n/m.hih.gov/science96
• Novartis: http://www.novartis.com/textsite/index.html
• UNESCO International Bioethics Committee:
http://www.unesco.org/ibc
About the Author:
Susan Bryce is a freelance investigative jour-
nalist whose interests include environmental
health, technology and global politics. Based
in southeast Queensland, Australia, she is
available for public speaking engagements.
NEXUS • 83